Juventus 3-0 Napoli: 3-5-2 v 3-4-3

Juventus were by far the better side – they move two points behind leaders Milan.

Antonio Conte, as expected, moved to 3-5-2 with Paolo De Ceglie the left wing-back. There was a surprise upfront, where Alessandro Matri was left out, and Marco Borriello partnered Mirko Vucinic.

Walter Mazzarri’s first XI is always easy to predict, and there were no surprises in the usual 3-4-3 shape.

The reverse fixture was goal-crazy (although a fascinating tactical battle too) – this was much tighter, and less interesting than it should have been. It’s rare to get a formation battle like this – although Conte has generally played a three-man defence against a three-man defence – having done so twice against Udinese, and now twice against Napoli.

Battlegrounds

Perhaps the players were prepared for the situation, because the battle in the first half was lacking in excitement. We had a very straightforward situation – see below-right. Napoli had a spare man at the back, there was a 2 v 2 in the middle, and a wing-back battle on the flanks.

The only issue was the battle at the other end, although this was the same situation as in the first meeting between the sides. Marek Hamsik dropped back and played around Andrea Pirlo (opposition coaches have worked out that you simply can’t leave Pirlo free) rather than playing high up in a natural front three. Therefore, rather than a 3 v 3 at the back and Pirlo free (which would have made goals more likely, at either end), both sides had a spare man at the back, and it was even in midfield.

Movement

So where were the attacking moves going to come from? A decent bet would have been down the flanks, but none of the four wing-backs significantly got the better of their opponent. Stephane Lichtsteiner was more conservative than usual despite one good early cross for Borriello at the near post, and Christian Maggio didn’t last long before being replaced by Andrea Dossena, with Juan Zuniga moving to the other side.

Instead, the focus turned to how one side could outfox the other at the back, and try and void their opponent’s spare man. In theory, Napoli could have done this (especially on the break) with Hamsik moving past Pirlo and high up the pitch. But their transitions were poor – they usually intercept the ball on the edge of their own third and motor forward brilliantly, but here they barely constructed a break in the entire game. Therefore, Hamsik was playing as a midfielder, and Juve remained comfortable.

The four battlezones

At the other end, Napoli’s man-marking system meant their back three was being dragged around. In theory, Paolo Cannavaro was the spare man behind Hugo Campagnaro and Salvatore Aronica, but the movement of Borriello and Vucinic was decent (even if their all-round game and workrate without the ball was poor). Therefore, The Napoli defenders weren’t quite sure of who was picking up who, with Cannavaro often being drawn high up the pitch and leaving a big gap between the two remaining centre-backs. Other times, Aronica was drawn into the centre as Vucinic drifted laterally, but Arturo Vidal was often too deep to take advantage of this – he should have been motoring past Walter Gargano more.

Set-piece goal, Napoli respond poorly

The crucial goal was always going to be the opening goal, and Juve got it after half-time, thanks to a free-kick. The way the goal went in – off Cannavaro – was comical and fortunate, but Napoli had conceded far too many free-kicks within their own third, especially when you consider their previous problems in this area (and Pirlo’s brilliance).

Mazzarri then had to move to a more attacking approach, and he brought on Goran Pandev for Gokhan Inler. Hamsik moved a little deeper, but Napoli now seemed more like a front four than a front three, and they pressed Juve 4 v 4 high up the pitch at goal-kicks. This left Gargano on his own against Vidal and Claudio Marchisio, and when the Uruguyan picked up a booking soon after this change, you wondered how much Juve would attempt to attack towards him on the break, and how much longer he would remain on the pitch.

As it happens, Juve didn’t look to break too much – they focused on keeping the ball (which is, of course, also where their midfield advantage came into play). Mazzarri then brought on Blerim Džemaili for Hamsik and reverted to something more like the 3-4-3, albeit with Džemaili playing much higher up than Inler had been (his position was essentially between Inler’s and Hamsik’s, the two departed players).

Still, he was too high up the pitch to do much defensively, and Marchisio and Vidal promptly combined for a quick attack at the Napoli defence and Vidal fired in. Substitute Fabio Quagliarella rounded it off with a good third.

Conclusion

This was very tight and tense in the first half, and it seemed as if a clever change from either coach (probably Conte, the man more likely to switch formation midway through the season) would decide the game. It didn’t take that – Conte’s decision not to change his forwards at half-time was odd – and it was a set-piece that helped get the breakthrough. The use of Borriello (and three centre-backs) helped the set-piece threat, not that there was any great design behind the goal.

Juve were much the better side, however. They had more strength and more guile, and Napoli’s counter-attacking threat was never apparent.

39 Responses to “ Juventus 3-0 Napoli: 3-5-2 v 3-4-3 ”

Nice report. It always fascinates me why the 3 man defence is so popular in Italy and (almost) non existent in most other major European leagues.

Forza Juve on April 1, 2012 at 10:49 pm

I think the 1st game in November was so frantic b/c we didn’t know how to pay the 3-5-2 yet and were completely unaccustomed to it. Now, we know the drill of the formation and it’s a pretty good plan B for us. Two things though:

1) Woulda preferred Caceres for Licht in this game, as Martin is a much better WING BACK than Licht. However, Licht is probably the better FULL BACK than Caceres.

2) The 1st half was woeful both as a spectacle and performance (of both teams). As much as the 3-5-2 gives us great defensive solidity (most especially against teams that also play 3-men in def) it completely kills our offense. It’s good to stifle opponents strengths, but does far too little to bring out OUR OWN (offensive) strengths; it’s definitely not the answer to our offensive problems. It may be even a little too reactive?

Nevertheless, fabulous victory all in all, great 3 pts, and a great report again ZM!

Molto Grazie!

Mike P on April 1, 2012 at 11:18 pm

1) I only see Juve play sporadically on TV, but based on the reputations of the two players, I would have said the opposite: Cacares is the better defensive option (comfortable at both centre- and full-back), whereas Lichtsteiner is more attacking (a modern wing back). I’d be interested to know why you think it’s the other way round?

2) Whilst I admire Conte for developing and using a plan B, I get your point about the 3-5-2. That formation could be more creative, if the team lined up as a 3-4-1-2 or 3-4-2-1, but fitting Pirlo into such a system is problematic – he can’t really play as a number 10, as one of the two central midfielders or in a role like Busquets, dropping back as the third centre-back. He has to play with two other centre mids doing his running for him, hence the slightly fantasy-lite 3-1-4-2/3-3-2-2.

Anon on April 1, 2012 at 11:59 pm

1) Caceres joined in on January, which means he need to work more on his defensive duties (1st Coppa encounter vs Milan exposes his weakness on defending), Licht nailed it since the beginning of the season. Another thing is Caceres arguably has more stamina and Licht at this time of the season, we rarely saw Licht storming forward for full 90 like the first half of the season, while Caceres could bring that extra energy. Thus, lots of Juve fans conclude that Caceres is better offensive option for now. He should’ve picked up his defensive duties by next season and we will see who will be Conte’s first choice RB. For now, Licht is definite first choice because his link-up play with Pepe.

2) 3-4-1-2 or 3-4-2-1 won’t be used because as Conte said at post-match, the core was the 3-midfield around MVP, he could change things at back or at front, but not changing the 3-midfield. Therefore, he could implement 3-5-2 (with 2 WB), or 3-4-3, or 4-3-3. This is why Krasic and Elia left out of the team, because imo they are more accustomized for 4-4-2 formation. if Conte implement 3-4-1-2 then he would drop Pirlo for TQ like ADP, however, i believe TQ trend was left out from Serie A. we see how Sneijder (best at TQ), can’t get into form lately, also players like Cagliari’s Cossu, etc. Roma’s Totti also played different role than he used to.

Paul on April 2, 2012 at 4:59 am

I’m always interested to hear why people think Pirlo can’t play a more advanced role in the midfield… Every time I see Pirlo get up field, he looks magnificent and provides top-quality service in the box (which Juve lack desperately when Vucinic and Pepe play on the wings). Considering his age and lack of defensive merit, why continue to use him in front of the back 4? He started his career as a typical #10 at Inter, didn’t he?

I think Conte made a huge mistake letting go of Pazienza. I honestly don’t get the hype about Marchisio, and don’t think he deserves a starting role. Pazienza and Vidal would easily have bossed most opposing midfields. Playing these 2 together, with another runner like Pepe in MF, would free Pirlo to do some serious damage behind 2 strikers who know how to move off the ball (NOT Boriello, NOT Vucinic). The formation would be something like a 4-3-1-2.

Week after week, Conte’s team selection astounds me. If not for Buffon, this team would not be in 2nd place right now, and Conte’s butt would be on the line.

I think he doesn’t suit an attacking midfield role because of his lack of pace and poor goal stats, he would slow down counter attacks and hardly ever score himself from open play, which you would need from your AM.

Juventus need him infront of their defense. He allows Juventus to get the ball forward consistently (an underrated quality needed for every team) and actually defends space quite well (his interception are usually good) its just his tackling which is poor. If you played him ahead of the midfielders you mentioned it wouldnt work. Players like Vidal and Pepe etc are not good at holding the midfield and staying in position, they like to press high up and use their energy. With your set up I think a lot of space would be left between the midfield and defense.

The set up now is perfect, with Pirlo given space to control the midfield as the two CM’s ahead push up and do all the running and tackling high up the pitch. This is also allows Pirlo to drift forward unnoticed and become a threat. Marchisio is a good player as well, I would argue hie brings good pressing and a great ability to time his late runs into the box, his goal scoring from midfield has been key for Juventus this season. He might not be overly talented, but he works in this system (similar to how Lampard excelled).

I would just like to touch on the subject in the role of an attacking midfielder: it is not overly necessary for an attacking midfielder to score goals, since their position is not reminiscent to a striker but to string the play together. If Pirlo were to play as an attacking midifleder, for example in a 3-4-1-2 or a 4-1-2-1-2 formation, then yes of course his lack of physical attributes would hinder, but however, I doubt it would be a terrible decision since he would be able to control the play further up the pitch and help Juventus in their attacking thirds.

Though the same, I agree with the statement.

Mike P on April 2, 2012 at 8:56 pm

Great player though he is, Pirlo would be wasted as a #10. In that position, you need to drive at goal like KP Boateng/Kaka, play killer through balls like Zidane or drift as a central winger like Ozil. Pirlo’s best qualities are his range of passing and the ability to dictate his team’s play. Without the necessary turn of pace/fantasy/horizontal movement, he would be so ineffective that high up the pitch.

Also, Marchisio provides the sort of late runs from midfield to this team that Lampard did/still does. Pazienza, to my knowledge, couldn’t fill that role. Marchisio connects Juve’s midfield and attack – without him they’d be a broken team.

Paul on April 2, 2012 at 9:56 pm

All interesting and valid points…. I just feel like we/Juve were handed a winning lotto ticket with Pirlo on a free transfer. I fear Conte is running him to death. In so many games this season the attack has looked stagnant, maybe I’m dreaming, but I still believe Pirlo can reinvent himself as an advanced mid. He’s a way better option than anyone Conte currently gives playing time to.

Yes, he’s not an all-action type like Kaka, Van der Vart, Boateng, etc., but with his passing skills, he doesn’t need to be. He just needs an enforcer beside him, i.e., Vidal.

One more point, when your offensive outlets are Pepe and Vuch, what difference does it make if you’re setting them up from deep or not? If Marotta can pick up an attacking Mid this summer, we’ll be good.

Scott on April 2, 2012 at 11:08 pm

..because Pirlo failed at it. It’s not speculation, it’s fact. He twice failed to become a 1st team player for Inter Milan playing in that position. It wasn’t until he was loaned out to Brescia that he found his niche as a deep-lying playing maker. Milan bought him up and continued to play him there and that is where he shined.

He’s a very creative and inventive player when given space, which means away from the opponents backline and pressing midfield. And you won’t find anybody better at accurate long passes… something you can’t do in a #10 role when you’re basically on top of the opponents defense. He looks dangerous getting forward because he does have the skill to be dangerous, but it’s because no one is expecting him to get forward. He knows when to pick his spots. As a permanent #10, he’d always be picked up and played out of space.

I’m not saying he couldn’t make a career of being a #10, but he’s not a world-class #10, and not a Milan, Juventus, Inter Milan, etc #10. He’s a world-class deep-laying playmaker.

stef on April 3, 2012 at 12:47 am

@Paul,
Conte has been incredible this season. Juventus have had more possession in every match, have not been defeated, and surely the major absence in the team is a striker that finishes the many chances that the team creates.

Juventus had 27 attempts against Napoli and had 3 goals scored by players other than the starting forwards. Consider the amount of chances against Genoa, most of which fell to the strikers, as well as other drawn matches throughout the year, and we can see that goalscoring is the team’s biggest problem.

Paul on April 3, 2012 at 1:27 am

@ Scott
More completely valid points. I will shut up now about Pirlo.

@Stef below…
I guess you and I are seeing two completely different things. In the last game against Napoli, Juve played what I would consider possibly their finest 45 minutes of the year in the 2nd half. This performance was not indicative of the rest of the season.

Yes, we’ve not been defeated and that’s largely due to Buffon playing out of his mind during the first half of the season. Bonucci, prior to the past few weeks, has been terrible. Don’t get me wrong, I’m thrilled that Juve have a shot at the Scudetto, but something is not right. Maybe I’m not being fair to this team, comparing them to the Juve of the mid to late 90’s and early 2000’s, but they’ve set the standard for excellence, and that’s what I expect to see.

I think Matri is unfairly criticized. He’s been great so long as he gets service. In the 4-3-3 with Vuch and Pepe on the wings, it’s been ridiculous. The LACK of quality chances they create is astounding, which is why I just don’t understand their inclusion week after week.

SJ_JUVE on April 5, 2012 at 3:02 am

i couldnt reply to ur latest post (not familiar with this site) so here it is.

Pirlo’s best quality is dictating the tempo with his accurate passing n spreading of the play no one can do that better than him n due to his physical limitation (cant take hard challenges/no speed) he is best suited for deep-lying playmaker/regista.

If u put him as trequarista/attacking mid he cant dictate play he will just be providing the final ball which wont allow juventus dominance they had. When he does move up field it is after the wingers and marchisio/vidal have pin the opposing mid back n he can spread to wings or take a long range shot.

Pazienza was a pirlo sub never a marchisio sub. in few games he played he played in pirlo’s role n he did quite decent, only marchisio sub is giach n giach is a more attacking player. The room marchisio creates in mid n his runs n all his tactical work can only be appricated if u watch the game live.

I agree on matri dont get why he is criticized for the amount of shots n dominance we have over opponents he just gets an average 2.5 shots/game. even trez will find it difficult in this stats. Hate vucinic, he is good but waay to selfish, pepe got a bit arrogant but he gets back to normal n if play with adp/quags while matri up top pepe can get back to early season form

AB on April 2, 2012 at 12:05 am

Like I’ve said before on this website, Juve’s formation is known as a 4-4-2 in America, specifically, a diamond defense.

Not really.
I understand what you’re saying, Juve’s starting positioning is similar to the stopper/sweeper 4-4-2 formation that is unfortunately still too prevalent in US youth soccer. However, the roles and the types of players that occupy each position are completely different. The role Pirlo plays in Juve’s system can definitely be described as a midfield role. He isn’t a defender by any stretch of the imagination. The player that would typically occupy that position in US youth soccer is more of a pure defender. Usually a physical and athletic player who’s first responsibility is to break up the opposition’s play, which is why it makes sense to describe that player at the 4th defender in a 442. The other major difference is the role of the wing backs. Present day wing backs are typically players that have played full back in a 4 man defense for most of their careers. American youth teams usually use players that are more like wingers in those positions.

Juve dominated in the middle of the field. I think this was in part due to a tactical advantage, but also the fact that Juve’s players individually just outplayed Napoli’s. I understand the way ZM circled the 4 battlezones in that one diagram. But you could look at the middle battle zone as almost a 4 v 2(at least a 4 v3) in Juve’s favor. You could look at that as a diamond for Juve and included Vucinic and Pirlo around Gargano and Inler with Hamsik trying to stay close to Pirlo. Thats how it looked to me for most of the game, especially in the first half when Juve had lengthy spells of possession.

AB on April 3, 2012 at 4:00 pm

I don’t think it’s unfortunate that many American youth teams play this formation. If it works, why stop?

That said, I think you give a good explanation of why Americans would call this formation a 4-4-2. That’s why I find it an interesting comparison — Pirlo would never be used as a stopper in America, although I have started to see some youth teams play skilled passers in that position lately.

JS on April 5, 2012 at 2:29 pm

it clearly doesn’t work though, as has been proven by the constant failure of our national team to put out a decent team in a country of over 300 million people… the youth teams are where all our current USMNT players came from

Scott on April 2, 2012 at 7:27 pm

“Juve’s formation is known as a 4-4-2 in America, specifically, a diamond defense.”

As an American, I do not stand by this statement. Juve do not play a stopper/sweeper defense (aka “diamond defense”). Pirlo is not a stopper or even a defensive midfielder. He’s a deep-laying playmaker.

In my opinion, somebody’s been watching too many youth league soccer matches.

AB on April 3, 2012 at 4:07 pm

You’re right and you’re not right. At first glance, most Americans would call Juve’s formation a 4-4-2 just because of the shape.

You’re right that this wouldn’t be considered your standard American 4-4-2 diamond defense because of Pirlo’s skill set. Like Duece said above, a typical stopper in America used to be a purely defensive player. Nowadays, more and more youth teams are using players with Pirlo’s skill set as their stopper, so that’s where you’re wrong.

JayM on April 2, 2012 at 9:02 pm

you do realise that conte has been switching between four and three at the back a few times this season, sometimes even mid-game (e.g. against milan two weeks ago)?

that reminds me a bit of the premier league, where english newspapers and tv stations traditionally write down every team as a 4-4-2 because they can’t grasp the idea that someone might actually play a different formation…

Locost on April 3, 2012 at 5:10 am

You think that’s bad? In the sixties Brtish TV and programme writers still pretended everyone played the 2-3-5 pyramid!

JayM on April 3, 2012 at 10:57 pm

haha I’m too young (and not British) to know that – but it doesn’t surprise me, given today’s standard of British punditry… (with the pleasant exception of Glenn Hoddle and Gary Neville)

In defense, Bonucci kept Cavani quiet in the air, Barzagli read Lavezzi runs excellently and Chiellini without anyone to mark, moved out of defense to have a good effect on the game. The wing backs was anonymous but did the job of keeping the Napoli wing backs quiet which was crucial in stopping Napoli breaking.

But it was in midfield they dominated. Pirlo controlled the game easily I thought and Napoli couldn’t get near him. Marchisio and Vidal helped by pressing the Napoli two CM’s and creating space for him. They also stopped Napoli getting the ball forward easily by doing this and I think teams have started to realise that stopping the wingbacks and pressurizing the CM’s of Napoli can stop them getting the ball forward. If anything Juventus needed to push Marchisio and Vidal further up, because as ZM said they could have took advantage of gaps in the defense.

Up front, Borriello was rather poor I thought, static and poor at holding the ball up. Vucinic did better to work the other CB’s and create space for midfield runners, credit to his non-stop running. But Juventus could have done with another forward on the pitch today, to offer more penetration as they before the rather lucky opener Napoli were doing okay as Juventus were reluctant to push their midfield too high. It was only when Napoli had to try and chase the game that they opened up and pummeled.

Napoli needed Campagnarro to offer more on the ball today, he was rather quiet when they needed him to get ball forward quickly with his long range passes. Hamsik was also unused, they should have tried to exploit Pirlo’s poor defensive ability by getting him to run at him, but he didn’t get the ball enough, though he should have worked harder to stop Pirlo dominating the game. In general the 3 could have been more fluid as they were quite rigid in position, this could have opened up Juventus more (look at Vucinic at the other end of the pitch – rarely in one position for very long).

Borriello rather poor? He was completely and utterly shit, as he has been every time he’s featured for Juventus. I know Matri has been slightly out of form lately, but at least whenever he is on he offers some movement, pace, and above all, his finishing is way and beyond what Borriello could even dream of achieving.

haha I just didn’t want to be to harsh, but I agree, can’t believe he is still playing for Juventus

Locost on April 2, 2012 at 1:12 am

I like coaches who are brave enough to go 1 v 1 against a front three. In theory it should release an extra man into midfield. If the opposition are playing 4-3-3 the extra midfielder will give you parity in the middle. In Napoli’s case of course it was 3-4-3 so they had to react to the extra body in midfield which is why Napoli’s 3 man attack became 2 up and one in the hole.

I’ve grown up with 4-4-2 v 4-4-2 battles which always left the centrebacks 1 v 1 against two forwards and don’t see why a 3 man attack should be any different.

A 4-3-3 v 3-5-2 match should come down to 2 v 2 at one end of the pitch, 3 v 3 in the middle and 3 v 3 at the other end of the pitch. At the end of the day, the wingbacks and fullbacks will have space in front of them and I would put my money on a wingback presenting a more attacking threat than a fullback any day.

I’m extremely impressed with your writing skills as well as with the layout on your blog. Is this a paid theme or did you customize it yourself? Anyway keep up the excellent quality writing, it is rare to see a great blog like this one today.

Locost on April 2, 2012 at 7:58 am

Agreed

Michael Cox has marshalled his pixels well at the back, flooded the midfield with mega-bits and utilsed his graphics to good effect up front.

And they claim that those of us who are interested in tactics suck all life out of the game!

So who do you think will win Euro2012?

Spain, thier website format is really fexible and innovative!

Juvefan on April 2, 2012 at 8:36 am

For me Juve luckily got this match.The first half was boring and it was a classical italian match for X.I was hoping that Conte would make changes and bring somebody instead of Borrielo and even change to 4-1-4-1.This lucky goal from the set piece decided the match.If it had not been for it,I think that match would have been going for a X or even 2.Conte should use 4-1-4-1 formation,De Ceglie and Lichtsteiner aren’t wingers,they are wing backs,good wing backs.Borrielo at the front-wtf?He was very poor and honestly don’t have idea why Conte likes him so much.

Only 2 points at the top now. Neither side has got the hardest run-in either. Although Juventus have still got to play Lazio and Roma at home. The best thing is that its Inter v Milan on the last day of the Serie A season! Surely Juventus won’t go the entire season without losing and not win the league?

This match ultimately proved that, with an excellent striker upfront, Juve would be a top European team.

Lebowski on April 2, 2012 at 12:39 pm

And yet, they scored 3 goals…

Juve clearly won the midfield battle, but I don’t think the match could have gone a better way for them. As said in the article, most of their opportunities came from set pieces and Napoli had a couple phases where they got control of the midfield and built up pressure, but failed to create a concrete goal scoaring opportunity.

The two other goals were, in my opinion, the result of Napoli being too reckless and leaving too much space for counter-attacks. Hadn’t it been for the lucky first goal, I don’t believe the end result would have been 3-0.

But clearly, Juventus deserves its victory and was the dominating side for most of the match.

Ivan on April 2, 2012 at 12:33 pm

Conte has no reason, no reason at all to play Boriello, yet he does. He is Amauri 2.0 – useless. Del Piero showed him in 10 min how football is played. Not to mention what he did against Milan and Inter last week. It a shame for a club like Juve to treat his best player of all time like this – sitting on the bench while “players” like Boriello play in the first team.

ormishen on April 2, 2012 at 1:49 pm

Well, the difference is that Amauri actually was really good when he first came to Juve. He sort of reminded me of Drogba early on, but then something happened and it’s like he just suddenly lost his talent. Sadly he hasn’t found it yet.

Borriello has achieved nothing in the Juve shirt so I’d say he’s even worse than Amauri.

To be fair though, Del Piero came in to the game when it was almost over, competition wise. So he wasn’t really up against much opposition from the Napoli players. That said, he is pura class through and through. I really do hope that somehow he ends up staying another season. I’m fairly confident that just his presence helps the Juve cause.

Its like you learn my mind! You appear to understand a lot approximately this, such as you wrote the
e-book in it or something. I feel that you just can do with a few percent
to drive the message home a little bit, however
instead of that, that is fantastic blog. An excellent
read. I’ll certainly be back.

petr on April 2, 2012 at 8:45 pm

Agreed. ZM should publish a book, be it an e-book or otherwise. Good point about Napoli needing a few extra percent to drive the ball home a little bit, the 3 tenors aren’t really the same when Hamsik drops deeper down the pitch.

Look forward to your return on here with the same analysis!

rooperk on April 3, 2012 at 7:48 am

What juve needs is a good striker. Maybe higuain or tevez. And good young midfielders.